
¥■35 



T^ 



^ ^1 



cr ccvi 




AMERICAN SOCIETY OFTTlVIL ENGINEERS. 

I X C O R P O R A T E D 18 5 > . 



Note. — This Society is not responsible, as a body, for the facts and opinions advanced 
in any of its publications. 



At the Fourth ANNUAii Convention of the Society, held at 
Chicago, June 5th and (3th. 1872. 



EXPERIMENTS ON CEMENTS. 

A paper presented by Edmund Yakdley, Cml Engineer, 
Member of the Society. 

peeeatoey. 

During several years pa.st I have, from time to time, found it neces- 
sary to make experiments on the cements oflfered to me for use on the 
Penn.sylvania Ranroad ; and during the past twelve months I have 
tried several brands in a more systematic way, the results of which, I 
tnist. may not he uninteresting to members of the Society. 

My primary object in communicating these results is to furnish 
data as to the strength of the cements exf)erimented upon, that will 
be of use to members as means of comparison with other cements, they 
may have occa.sion to try; but incidentally I shall, I think, correct 
one or two errors into which, if I mistake not, many engineers h-ive 
fallen. 

The first and most serious of these errors, it seems to me, is to 
take simply, as to its setting or non-setting quality, the behavior of a 
ball of cement whpn immersed in water, for the true and only criterion 
of its valne. Yet this is so frequently done, that I know of important 
works now going on, in which no other test of cements is made. I ^ 
not question that a cement, not setling, should be rejected; but it will 



TA f3i' 



154 ' 



take but a casual examination of the Tables annexed to show great 
variations in value of those which pass this test, for I suppose all will 
agree that the true measure of the value of a cement is the strength, 
both cohesive and adhesive, it ultimately exhibits. 

My experiments are defective in regard to this measure in two 
respects. First, I only have obtained the coheswe strength ; and, 
second ; — up to the longest time any mixture had been immersed, it 
was shown to be still increasing in strength. But they are not value- 
less on this account, for the cohesive strength is the more important 
element; and though the ultimate strength has not been obtained, the 
relative strength of the specimens cannot be far out of the way. 

Another error of less moment, but still important, which is preva- 
lent among engineers, is to assume that if two cements hold certain 
relations as to strength when pure, they will hold the same, or nearly 
the same relation, if each is mixed with an equal quantity of sand. A 
few experiments sutEce to change this view. 

My own idea as to obtaining tlie relative value of two cements is 
to mix one or both with sand until of the required strength, and then 
to calculate the values of the mixtures. Thus, a cement "A" costs 
75 cents per bushel, and when mixed with two parts of sand, worth, 
say, 5 cents per bushel, it is equally strong with a cement "B," 
which sells for 40 cents per bushel. Evidently "A," costing, when 
mixed, one third of 85 cents, is the cheaper of the two. 

I am aware that the experiments are incomplete, but I have tried 
to make what there is, accurate. Any result of which I had the least 
doubt has been rejected, unless it has served to indicate some point, 
and then its exact reliability lias been noted. In some cases (especially 
the trials given in the first Table) subsequent experiments developed 
their incompleteness, though at the time they were considered 
reliable. 

MANNEB OF MAKING THE TESTS. 

The manner of making the experiments was as fellows: The cement 
under inspection, either pure or mixed with a proportion of sand, as 
the case might be, was made into a mortar as near' the consistency of 



1. These were made about the consistency of ordinary mortar. Subsequent 
experiments seemed to indicate that very generally, though not universally, 
the less water that was used above a sufficiency to mix, the stronger the fusion. 
Hence, in the latter experiments, I have been as careful in measuring the 
water as the cement, — (See Experiments Nos. 24. 38, 97, et seq.) 



155 



that ordinarily used by workmen as possible, and wa3 then worked 
with a spatula into a mould 1 inch square and about 8 inches long, 
placed horizontally-. When the prism had set sufficiently it was 
removed from the mould, and, after about 24 hours, immersed in 
water, (except in the case of some, in the earlier experiments, which 
were not immersed). At the end of about 30 days, the specimens 
were removed, and broken by a direct weight applied to the center 
between supports 6 inches apart. The broken halves being again 
immersed were, after varying intervals, broken between supports 
3 inches apart. 

REMARKS ON T.VBLE I. 

The experiments in this Table (next page,) were carefully made, 
but there should have been more than one sj^ecimen of each tried, as 
faulty manipulation may have weakened a good cement. 

I am sorry that I had only this test on the Louisville brand, which 
appears to be so weakened by the addition of sand. As this cement 
has borne a good reputation, I have asked the agents for another 
specimen, in order to satisfy myself of the above result being correct, 
though I have no leason — except there only being one prism tried — to 
doubt it. 



*2. As the value of experiments increases with the number of others we are 
able to compare them with, it i.s proper for me to explain why I have pro- 
ceeded difiereutly from onr standard American authority, General Gilmore, 
whom, it will be remembered, used a prism, 2 inches square, in a vertical 
mould, which set under a pressure of 32 lbs. per square inch, and was finally 
broken between supports 4 inches apart. My reasons briefly are these: at 
the time I made mj'^ fii-st experunents, I did not have Genenxl GUmore's book 
at hand; and when I afterwards procured it, for the purpose of making my 
experiments conform to his, I concluded to keep the size I had adopted, and 
to m-ge it for use to others, for the reason that to make the experiments with 
it requires no elaborate or expensive apparatus; all that I have used being an 
ordinary twine string to support the x^latform for the weights, and two pieces 
of boxwood scale for the supports. For breaking the 3 inch pieces I used an 
equally simple apparatus, which multiplied the weight applied eleven times. 
This of course, would be a very poor reason if any accuracy were sacrificed, 
but I cannot see that it has been. The 2 inch square prism contains more 
cement, but we have only to increase the number of our tests to get an equally 
reliable average. The horizontal mould I prefer to the vertical, as I believe 
it gives a fusion of more uniform strength. The jDressure applied by him 
undoubtedly accords more nearly with practice ; and should there be any 
reason to suspect that some cements were different relatively under pressure 
from what they are without it, I should consider it necessary to use it, even if 
it caused considerably more trouble. 



156 



Where more than one experiment is marked, the data have been 
partly derived from pieces broken between 3 inch supports, and reduced 
to what they would have been with 6 inch supports. An examination 
of the following Tables will show that there is no very close result 
obtained in this reduction, but I had to make it in this case, to con- 
dense and simplify the results from which the Table was obtained. 

The Table shows the fallacy of judging of the strength of cements 
mixed with sand, from that of pure cements. In fact, in case of the 
Phoenix we see the unexpected result of an improvement in strength 
by the mixture, a result I felt doubtful about, until I found the same 
thing again in a cement, (the Allen) tried subsequcLtly. 

The results, as far as they go, also seem to indicate that it is an 
improvement to cements, to set under water rather than in the air. 

SECOND SERIES OF EXPEEIMENTS. 

Guided by the experience derived from the earlier experiments, I 
used additional care in those which follow. In all cases I have made 
at least 3 prisms, of any particular mixture ; and to guard against 



T?.^^:^I_iEl 



Breaking weights of one inch square prisms of different mixtures of cement 
and sand, between supports 6 inches apart. Prepared as noted above. 
Age 30 days. Eesults generally derived from a sbujle specimen. 





Pure Cement. 


Cement 2, Sand 1. 


1 
Cement 1, Sand 1. 


)f Ex- 
.s from 
verage 
ed. 




xSg, 


i 


^i& 


1 




Brea 
ght. 
es 
pois. 




Brea 
ght. 
es 
pois. 




Brea 

ght. 

es 

pois. 




^ r^<S^. C 


(U O 3 


^Vt-t*. c 


CD O 3 


" ti<l^ £2 


(UUP 




umber 
perimei 
which 
is obtai 




umber 
perimei 
which 
is obtai 


verage 

ingW 

Oun 

Avoird 


umber 
perimei 
which 
is obtai 


verage 

ingW 

Oun 

Avoird 




;^ 


< 


^ 


< 


:?; 


< 


Eosendale, ■^ set in air. 


2 


285 


3 


182 


2 


123 


Louisville,') " " . 


2 


220 


2 


61 


2 


37 


' ' set under water . 


1 


230 


1 


127 


1 


72 ■ 


Phoenix, 5 set in air . . . 


1 


112 


3 


162 


3 


110 


" set under water. 






2 


185 




.... 



3. " Rosendale, " F. O. Norton, 91 Wall street, New York, from stock ou 
hand; it was about a year old. 

4. "Louisville," furnished by Laing]& McKallip, agents, Pittsburgh; age 
unknown, probably fresh. 

5. ' ' Phoenix, " purchased from J. R. Beesen, Uniontown. Fayette County, 
Pennsylvania. 



157 



Breaking weights of one inch square prisms of ditferent mixtures of cement 
and sand, between supports G inches apart, — loaded at the "middle. Kept 
under water, alter the time specitied from mixing, 



c 


c 


-d 


c 

s 

(U 


O 3 C 


o 

0) •" . 






be 


1 


S 
U 

c 

5 


a 

4) 


1 


m-, 


-5 v; C 


o 




4) « 




O 

1 


o 
Oh 


o 
d 








Ill 
1 ^ 


a3 be 


REM.\RKS. 

i 




1 





22 
'^8 


Not 


About 


34 


210.7 
250.1 


241 


Top up. ' 
Side up. 




" 


" 


24 


measured. 


.^^• 


^' 


203.8 




Bottom up."' 




2 


1 


27 


«. 




38 


220.5 




Top up. 


•o 


" 


• ' 


28 


" 




40 


285.0 


280 


Side up. 


« 


" 


" 


29 


" 




" 


335.5 




Bottom up. 


H 


1 


'i 


30 


" 




39 


100.9 




Top up. 


< 


" 


2 




31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
30 


a 


,1 


38 
37 


102.4 
223.3 
103.0 
75.3 
124.9 
249.0 


102 
101 


Side up. 
Bottom up. 




i 




s> 


37 


'« 






250.9 


240 




1 


•' 


«' 


38 




" 


" 


220.0 




jNIortar very thin. 


- 


2 


1 


57 


'« 


" 


38 


199.7 






H 


" 




58 


" 


" 


" 


100.0 


181 






" 




59 


.(< 


" 




181.9 







z 


1 


" 


72 


About 




32 


140.5 






x 


" 


" 


73 


33 






147.3 


140 


1(1 


^ 


" 


2 


74 


l)er cent. 

Not 
measured. 


,, 


,( 


150.5 

48.0 








" 


,t 


05 
06 


^j 


j; 


45.0 
55.3 


50 




J 


'' 





39 
40 
41 


" 


i( 


35 

38 


393.3 
501.0 
451.3 


408 


Thinnest of the 3. 


1 = 


2 


1 


52 


" 


■ ' 


40 


104.9 




" " 


! fi 


" 


'» 


53 


" 


• ' 


" 


304.0 


271 




^ 


" 


" 


54 


" 




" 


343.1 






i s 


1 


" 


69 


" 


44. 


31 


194.0 






, ft 


" 


a 


70 


" 


'i 




214.1 


213 




" 


" 


71 


" 


" 


" 


229.2 






1 


" 


2 


61 

62 


" 


About 
24. 


32- 


39.4 
59.3 


01 


1 

1 


' 


" 


'« 


63 


" 


't 


83.9 






! - 


" 





97 


.44 


20. 


33 


108.5 






1 n 


" 


" 


98 


.37 


>' 


'i 


194.2 


194 






" 


" 


99 


.37 


" 


" 


220.4 






2 


1 


111 


.28 


48. 


" 


243.0 






t^ 


- 


- 


112 


.31 


i< 


t' 


247.9 


240 




P^ 


" 


" 


113 


.31 


" 


" 


230.4 




1 



6. The "Allen" cement is made at Easton, Pi-nnsylvauia. Berger A Butz, 
agents. 

7. Care was biken to notice which side of the specimen as made in the 



158 



ertor from the use of dift'erent kinds of sand, I employed a sand made 
by crushing the stone. This is easily obtained here, and is entirely 
free from loam. It is properly comparable, I should say, with the 
white sand used so extensively as a scouring material. It was passed 
through a sieve, of about 18 meshes to the inch, to separate the 
coarser pebbles, which might, if located at the point of breaking of 
the prism, vitiate the result. The cement was not sifted, as my desire 
was to get at its strength as it was, not as it might be if ground finer. 

Additional care was taken to have the cement and sand thoroughly 
mixed when dry, which was done, from experiments Nos. 30 to 48, by 
repeated (3) sittings. To save trouble, from the last to No. 72, they 
were merely thoroughly shaken together in a box; but as the strength 
of the specimens departed more widely from the average, I returned 
at No. 72 to the former plan, which I still use. 

In other respects the manner of proceeding was the same as that 
already described for the first experiments. 

KEMARKS ON TABLE IH. 

For this Table, the halves of the prisms already tested (per Table 
II. ) were broken again, between supports 3 inches apart. Therein is 
shown the gradual increase in strength of the cements up to 6 months 
for many of the cements, and we are enabled to judge how far trials 
made when the prisms are 30 days old will give us the actual relative 
value of the cements when they have attained their greatest strength. 



mould was up, (that is, exposed to a compressive strain when broken,) but 
after a few experiments, all were tried on the side as that seemed to give an 
average result. All after No. 33 were tried iu that way. 

8. Mortar was stiffer for this than tor Nos. 22 or 23. 

9. The first sample of this cement — that without sand — was received by 
the Pennsylvania Railroad Company in June, and the trials were made in 
October. That used in the other three mixtures was from a different barrel, 
about the same age. 

10. In all of the experiments a larger or smaller quantity of a light floc- 
culent matter, I supposed to be carbonate of lime, is found in the water. In 
this case there was a great deal, though the "Rosendale" generally had as 
little as any. In one case, which I have omitted for want of room, the water 
was very full, and the prism was very light and weak ; I think, indeed, most 
of the lime was dissolved ovit. 

11. "Hydraulic Diamond Cement." J. V. Devling & Co., Flemington, 
Clinton County, Pennsjdvania ; from stock purchased. 

12. These prisms were bowed up somewhat when taken from the water, 
and seemed cracked. 

13. From a new barrel; the cement about 10 months old. 



159 



T?.i^:^I-jE XXX. 



Breaking weights of the prisms (Table II. \ bot ween supports 3 iiu-hes apart, 
for different ages up to months. Prisms kept under water the whole 
time. 



c 

o 
c 

2 


o 

1 




1 

6 ' 


30 days. 1 


60 days. 


! 90 days. 

1 


6 months. 


^ B 


t 
. Wt. 

! 

ances. 


Sc B 

o 

1 Ox 


Wt. 
inces. 


6 
o 


B. Wt. 

Ounces. 


6 

si 
W 


B. Wt. 
OuBces. 


Average 

at 
6 months 

1 




1 





22 


..i 


i 


68 


984 


1 




188 


1458 ) 








" 


23 


35 1 


576 






106 


"969 






1458 






( t 


24 


35 


627 






j . . . 












1 


27 


40 


658 


67 


94i 


1 




187 


1625 
1349 V 








(( 


28 




... 


! .. 




105 


io'io 


«' 


1424 


§ 




" 


29 




• • 






' 




" 


1299 ) 




'^ 






30 






■67 


57i 






186 


905 




< 


" 


2 

(( 



31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 




'■'■■ 


162 

1 • • 

;6i 


366 
755 


104 

99 


' 620 
505 


182 


859 V 
715 ( 
607) 
525 > 
703 \ 

1093 

1200 - 


286 
637'" 






" 


37 






1 . 




197 


lois 


" 


1073 






" 


38 


37 


440 






... 




" 


925) 




,J 




1 


57 


40 


558 






_ 


.... 


" 


1761) 
1631 y 




^ 




(i 


58 






i 




95 


992 


" 


1756 




(( 


" 


59 






58 


725 


1 . . . 


.... 


" 


1876 ) 








2 


72 
73 
74 
64, 


33 
32 


297 
159 




• • • 


i... 

... 
!. . . 




174 


"698) 
644 - 

607 j 


.... 






»' 


65 










96 


,319 


a 


650 






" 


66 1 






63 


215 


1 • • ■ 




" 












39 










i 93 


1520 


190 


1356) 
1156 1 
1620 1 








" 


40 










] 






1377 






" 


41 


42 ] 


1414 


64 ] 


L376 






189 








1 


52 


43 


426 












1102) 




Q 




" 


53 






1 ' * 


'.'. '. 


90 


1120 


185 


1550 I 


1457 


1 




" 


54 




. 


60 


874 




.... 




1719) 




S 




" 


69 1 










"98 


1069 






.... 


j3 




(( 


70 ! 






61. 


776 














" 


71 


33 


522 








.... 




.... 


.... 






2 


61 


32 


86 










175 


342 j 










32 
63 


32 


130 


64 


357 


r97 


.369 


:: 


'764 j 


523'^ 



14. Specimen No. 34 was cracked, and its value as an experiment was 
taken at one half the others. The other half of No. 35 bore 656 ounces, hence 
the average as given. 

15. Specimen No. 61, at 6 months' age, broke with the first weight, 342 
ounces. The average is not over the amount (523 ounces) stated. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



160 



019 448 874 9 



. • . CONCLUSION. 

From these Tables we see : — 

First. That a mixture of as much as one third sand does not 
diminish the ultimate cohesive strength of any of these cements, but 
in some cases increases it. 

Second. Comparing the three cements together at the end of 6 
months, there seems but little difference in their values; the strongest 
product being " Rosendale " mixed with one third sand. 

Third. While at 30 days we can form a close approximation as to 
the ultimate relative strengths of cements, it requires a much longer 
time (probably over 6 months) to determine it exactly. 



I 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 448 874 9 • 



Holliiiger 

pH S5 

MiU Run F03.2193 



